I suppose the idea is this, I've been hearing it long enough I should get it by now. Bad guys are not going to obey the no-guns-in-bars law. Good guys will. The result, only bad guys have guns in bars. We should allow guns in bars, so some good guys will also have guns in there to balance things out.

Is that about it?

It reminds me of what Captain James T. Kirk said:

Balance of Power, the trickiest, most dangerous game, but the only one that preserves both sides.

That came out of the memory banks from thirty years ago, or more, but you get the idea. Does it make sense that we strive to balance the power in this way, when by doing so we continually feed the gun flow to those very criminals we're worried about? Is our best approach to try to out-gun the bad guys in all places at all times?

Wouldn't it be better to eliminate guns from places where they don't belong?

One of the funniest pro-gun attacks is to call gun control folks bigots because we want to deprive others of their god-given natural human rights. Well, get a load of this guy. This is bigotry.

After introducing a bill that would tax money sent from the US to Mexico, the Congressman had this to say as justification.

When asked why he was targeting the Latin American countries with his new tax, he came up with a couple of reasons. He claimed that Hispanic immigrants are bringing many illnesses to this country like polio and plague. He also said that 99% of those receiving indigent care are Hispanics. Both of these charges are not just bogus, but also ridiculous.

The fact is that the last case of polio in Texas was in 1995 (about 16 years ago) and was contracted by a citizen who traveled abroad. The only incident of plague in the last 10 years was contracted on a hunting trip to New Mexico in 2006. Outside of Berman's bigoted brain there is absolutely no evidence that Hispanic immigrants pose any kind of health danger in Texas (or any other state).

I'd bet this guy knows which way to vote on gun issues too. Yet, I realize that as a group, Texas gun owners are definitely not racist. That's what we've been told anyway, over and over again.

Four of the five Interior Alaska residents arrested on state murder conspiracy charges last week now face federal charges after a federal grand jury announced two indictments this afternoon.

For Salcha couple Lonnie Vernon, 55, and his wife, Karen Vernon, 66, federal charges now include conspiracy to kill an IRS employee, U.S. District Judge Ralph Beistline and family members. The charges supersede an earlier indictment against Lonnie Vernon.

Fairbanks resident Francis “Schaeffer” Cox, 27, and Coleman Barney, 36, of the North Pole area now face federal charges of conspiracy to possess illegal weapons. Cox faces additional charges for the possession of a Sten machine gun and manufacture of a silencer.

A ruthless arms smuggler who poses as a Minnesota business man was arrested in India before he could cause any more suffering.

A Twin Cities CEO for a multibillion-dollar medical technology company was arrested at an airport in India with a live gun cartridge in his pants pocket as he was about to board a charter flight, a company official said.

Referee Anthony Schumacher was attacked at the start of a 10:15 a.m. civil commitment trial at the Government Center in Minneapolis, said District Judge Jay Quam, who presides over the county's probate and mental health courts.

Without warning, Truman Harper, 25, rushed Schumacher and hit him at least twice in the face before a deputy and others pulled him away. Quam said Schumacher did not appear to suffer serious injuries.

What would have happened if the referee had been armed, you know for personal protection? And imagine if some folks get their way, guys like the attacker will continue to buy guns legally - after he gets out of the nut house, that is.

In his article on the Brady Campaign site, Dennis Henigan described the president's letter as an attempt to take a middle ground which would be rejected by both sides. Yet, as it turned out, only the NRA rejected it, being uninterested in anything like finding common ground. The Brady Campaign found much to like in the statement.

For me, the most significant sentence in the article, and one curiously overlooked by the early commentators, is this: “If we’re serious about keeping guns away from someone who’s made up his mind to kill, then we can’t allow a situation where a responsible seller denies him a weapon at one store, but he effortlessly buys the same gun someplace else.” This is an unambiguous reference to a deadly anomaly in our gun laws. Under the Brady Law background check system, if a gun is purchased from a licensed dealer, there must be a background check, but in most states, if it is purchased from an unlicensed private seller, no check is required. Often these private sales occur at gun shows – thus legislation has been introduced to close this “gun show loophole.”

Indeed, many people on both sides of the debate accept that background checks are the first and most important policy change needed.

Although Dennis Henigan didn't allude to Obama's history of making promises which remain unfulfilled, he did sum up his statement with a type of warning.

At some point soon, the President must move beyond discussion to action and leadership. Far from being part of the solution, the NRA has shown, once again, that it is the problem. If President Obama truly wants a system that no longer allows countless violent criminals to “effortlessly” avoid background checks, eventually he will have no choice but to confront the gun lobby, and defeat it.

What's your opinion? Given the widespread agreement on the necessity of background checks, do you think President Obama will follow through on this? Wouldn't it be possible for him to do so without alienating gun owners at large?

I think this Red Bank is in South Carolina. But if you change the names and the place, you've got the same old story. An angry man, probably a lawful gun owner, kills his ex and her kids and himself.

What's unconscionable is that gun-rights advocates don't want to make it harder for guys like this to get guns. The reason? One can only guess. Mine is that they don't want to be inconvenienced themselves.

Imagine the narcissistic self-centeredness that could result in such a state of affairs. Gun control folks offer an array of restrictions which would have practically no affect on the law abiding, but would screen out many unsuitable characters, yet they rabidly resist.

via Wired Science. The problem is there's too much space junk. What's the solution, shoot it down of course.

NASA scientists have suggested shooting space junk with lasers before. But earlier plans relied on military-class lasers that would either destroy an object altogether, or vaporize part of its surface and create little plasma plumes that would rocket the piece of litter away. Those lasers would be prohibitively expensive, the team says, not to mention make other space-faring nations nervous about what exactly that military-grade laser is pointing at.

The laser to be used in the new system is the kind used for welding and cutting in car factories and other industrial processes. They’re commercially available for about $0.8 million. The rest of the system could cost between a few and a few tens of millions of dollars, depending on whether the researchers build it from scratch or modify an existing telescope, perhaps a telescope at the Air Force Maui Optical Station in Hawaii or at Mt. Stromlo in Australia.

Now, this story go me to thinkin'. The pro-gun folks are always goin' on about their right to own guns. According to them, this right is linked to the natural human right of life and self-defense of that life. You need the right tool to do all this self-defending.

Well, I suggest the first type of laser. The one they're going to use on the space junk is a bit too wimpy for our purposes. After all, we're talking about defending our very lives, right? Nothing short of the"military-class lasers that would either destroy an object altogether, or vaporize part of its surface and create little plasma plumes that would rocket the piece of litter away," will do.

Suicidal attackers cannot be deterred. The perpetrators of mass shootings are nearly always suicidal, and end up taking their own lives at the end of their rampages. Armed students would likely become the first targets of any suicidal attackers, who can prepare for such an attack by maximizing their firepower. For example, a crazed gunman who attacked a city council outside St. Louis, Missouri, in March 2008, first shot and killed two armed police officers before continuing his rampage. He even used one of the officer's guns in furthering his attack.

Neighbors of the house on Ironworks Lane reported hearing screaming matches, one as recent as this weekend. Customers at the gun shop owned by Michael H. Schriebman said they often heard loud, profane arguments between him and his 21-year-old nephew, Louis E. Schriebman.

The volatility reached a tragic crescendo early Tuesday morning when, police said, Louis Schriebman set his uncle's gun shop ablaze before fatally shooting his uncle; his 75-year-old grandmother, Sarah Bricker Schriebman; and Michael Schriebman's live-in girlfriend, a 50-year-old woman whose identity has not been released by police.

What's your opinion? Why wasn't the abusive uncle not able to protect himself with a gun of his own? Why didn't someone ensure that the unstable nephew was disarmed?

“Why should I or the N.R.A. go sit down with a group of people that have spent a lifetime trying to destroy the Second Amendment in the United States?” said Wayne LaPierre, the longtime chief executive of the National Rifle Association.

Yeah, that's a good example of tough talk like you find in high-school locker rooms. Blustering braggadocio that need not be grounded in reality is what you expect from 15-year-olds. But you have to wonder what La Pierre is up to. He's certainly no dummy, earning seven figures annually.

It's his listeners and fanboys who lack the ability to put two and two together. The folks who have "spent a lifetime trying to destroy the Second Amendment in the United States" are few and far between. The ones invited to this meeting are mainly well-meaning people who genuinely want to find common-ground solutions.

For example, a White House adviser on Monday said Mr. Obama wanted to redefine the gun debate to “focus on the people, not the guns.” The president, in his column, cited the same policy areas Mr. LaPierre mentioned as fertile ground for consensus. And Mr. Obama emphasized, “First, we should begin by enforcing laws that are already on the books” — a line long used by the gun lobby.

Among other things, the bill would increase penalties for states that do not properly turn over records of people who are already barred by federal law from owning a gun. The bill would also require federal agencies to certify twice a year to the U.S. Attorney General that they have submitted all relevant records to the background-check data base. Senator Charles E. Schumer recently introduced similar legislation in the Senate.

It is becoming increasingly clear that gun owners who oppose this do not have a leg to stand on.

This striking achievement came about this week during a meeting of the state House Appropriations Committee on efforts in Kansas to shoot feral swine from helicopters. Republican state Rep. Virgil Peck suddenly had an idea. “Looks like shooting these immigrating feral hogs works,” he commented, according to a recording posted by the Lawrence Journal-World. “Maybe we have found a [solution] to our illegal immigration problem.”

Kansas? Hullo? Can we talk?

There's a reason why employers don't locate in your state. There's a reason why your state universities and colleges wouldn't qualify as community colleges in other states. It's because of retards like Virgil Peck and the fact you want to teeach creationism in schools. As a result, you lower our national IQ.

The police said the deadly events were touched off about 8:15 p.m. by 21-year-old Anthony DiGeronimo, a self-described anarchist. Clad in what was called black leather “Satanic garb,” he had threatened neighbors with knives in the street, had retreated into his home and was killed by two Nassau County officers who fired seven times as he came out of a barricaded bedroom and charged at them with his knives.

About 10 minutes later, the police said, Officer Geoffrey J. Breitkopf, 40, a 12-year veteran of the Nassau force who worked in special operations, arrived in street clothes with a partner in an unmarked car, took a rifle from the trunk and was striding toward the house when he was shot once in the side.

I'd say this was a lot more than a "tragic accident." But it is a good illustration of how guns in the hands of the good guys can make matters worse.

The attempted MLK Day bombing in Spokane was hardly an isolated incident. Right-wing domestic terrorist plots and extremist violence are on the rise in America. Earlier this year the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)released a report analyzing domestic terrorism statistics reported by the FBI and other crime agencies since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The MPAC report shows that since 9/11, right-wing extremists including neo-Nazis and other white supremacists have been involved in 63 domestic terror plots, while radical Muslims have been involved in 45.

Naturally the pro-gun bloggers try to ignore the fact that guys like these comprise a significant percentage of their ranks, let's think of them as the lowest level. Then you've got the less extreme but equally hateful stratum. Above them there would be the apathetic ones. These three layers combined make up about 90% of the gun owners. What's left is the 10% who are truly responsible.

Now please don't confuse this with the other, more widely known 10%. That's another discussion, which may very well need to be updated.

It's a serious problem and restricting guns to dangerous and unqualified people is part of the solution.

A video posted online in June 2009 shows Alaska Congressman Don Young signing a revolutionary "Letter of Declaration" written by Alaska militia leader Schaeffer Cox, who was arrested yesterday along with four compatriots for allegedly plotting to kidnap and murder Alaska State Troopers and a Fairbanks judge.

At the 5:00 point, Schaeffer explains economics in a nutshell, simple enough for every gun owner to understand. At 7 minutes he explains how juries work. From there he goes right into what "sovereignity" really means.

Is this guy a smooth talker or what? Aren't your grass roots gun owners usually suspicious of slick salesmen like this guy? Is his con job so slick that it fools them? Or is his following not as widespread as he'd like us to think?

Monday, March 14, 2011

• First, we should begin by enforcing laws that are already on the books. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System is the filter that's supposed to stop the wrong people from getting their hands on a gun. Bipartisan legislation four years ago was supposed to strengthen this system, but it hasn't been properly implemented. It relies on data supplied by states - but that data is often incomplete and inadequate. We must do better.

• Second, we should in fact reward the states that provide the best data - and therefore do the most to protect our citizens.

• Third, we should make the system faster and nimbler. We should provide an instant, accurate, comprehensive and consistent system for background checks to sellers who want to do the right thing, and make sure that criminals can't escape it.

There's certainly nothing there to get upset about. A more reasonable proposition is hard to imagine. Robert Farago didn't see it that way though. He suggested this may be the first of several incrementally severe statements. And, as a bottom line of sorts, Robert said, "The instant you accept the antis’ premise that “some people just shouldn’t have guns” you have lost."

Speaking to the "you" plural of his readers, Robert Farago seems to be advising or preaching. The remark is a sort of rallying cry, meeting the president's extremely reasonable statement with extreme antagonism.

What's your opinion? Is President Obama just softening them up for the real plan? Or, is he issuing an honest statement which can be used in future policy making?

About Farago's extremism, do you think he really wants NO ONE prohibited from gun ownership? Could he really be that extreme?

Police were called to a home on Grover Avenue in Alma Thursday evening, following a complaint of a gunshot being fired inside the home.

Following a domestic dispute with his girlfriend, the resident fired a gun at the floor, Alma Director of Public Safety David Walsh said.

“No one else was home at the time,” he said.

The girlfriend had already left the house.

The resident, however was arrested for allegedly pushing his girlfriend, he said.

Lucky girl, at least so far.

Let me make a guess. He'll get off with a slap on the wrist, certainly nothing to threaten his god-given, natural human right to own guns. Then, the girlfriend will come back to him. Then sometime next year we'll read about them again.

What do you think? Is there a way to avoid or at least to make less likely a bad ending for these two? Yes there is.

The officers pursued the man on foot, during which time the man drew a weapon from his waistband and jumped a fence, the statement said.

The officers announced their office and ordered him to drop the weapon. He then turned and pointed the weapon in the direction of the officers. In fear of their lives, officers fired at him, striking him. Police shot the suspect outside in the 7000 block of S. St. Lawrence Ave., according to a Grand Crossing District police sergeant.

The man suffered a gunshot wound, possibly to the leg, and was in “stable” condition John H. Stroger Jr. Hospital of Cook County, according to Fire Media Affairs Chief Kevin MacGregor. He is in police custody at the hospital.

Police recovered drugs and a replica firearm from the man, according to police News Affairs. No officers were injured.

The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department says deputies shot and killed a man who led them on a chase with his motorcycle, challenged them to a fight then pointed what they believed was a gun at them.

The department says in a news release that reports Saturday said a motorcyclist was brandishing a firearm at drivers, and deputies briefly chased a suspect who matched the description.

The man soon abandoned the motorcycle in a street in the Willowbrook area, took off his helmet and challenged deputies to a fight.

The statement says when deputies approached him, he removed what appeared to be a handgun from his waist area, pointed it at them, and was shot.

The 24-year-old suspect was pronounced dead at the scene, and deputies recovered a replica gun.

Seriously, what is it with these fake guns? Do wannabe criminals carry them instead of real guns for some reason? What could it be?

Could the cops be planting fake guns on people? Is that less risky for them than planting real ones? Or have I been watching too many movies to even think cops do that kind of thing?

STL Today published an op-ed by Kevin Horrigan which makes some good points. Basically he's questioning why gun owners are so upset at the prospect of their names being made public.

Maybe the gang members and criminals on the mean streets of Hinsdale are smarter than the ones I've met. A lot of them can barely read. What are the odds that they're going to go through 1.3 million names (think of two fat phone books), and then try to find addresses (the attorney general says the addresses of FOID card owners don't have to be released) and then drive themselves to the right Bob Johnson's house and steal his guns?

Wouldn't it be easier to follow cars with pro-gun bumper stickers or NRA window decals?

What's your opinion? Is there another reason for opposition to the thtreatment of the FOID card list like other public records?

Sixty-three-year-old Glenn Seymour accidentally shot himself in the chest earlier this month in Douglas County while trying an advanced firing technique with a weapon he wasn’t familiar with using.

The guy was practicing a new manouever with the gun, using his left hand. The instructor may be in trouble. What do you think? Should the teacher be able to see that a pupil is untrained to the point of pointing the gun at his own chest, and take precautions beforehand?

It reminds me of the video they like so much over on The Truth About Guns. Not only do they overlook the reckless gun handling but they seem to be so impressed with the shooters willingness that they forgive all. Maybe it's the same thing. If the dead guy in Missouri accidentally didn't kill himself, all the pro-gun voices would be praising his newfound versitility.

Police say a gunman fatally shot a man in a truck outside a Frisch's Big Boy restaurant in Middletown and then killed himself.

Lt. Rodney Muterspaw said the shooter used his car to block the truck and then fired several shots at the other man, who was waiting for a woman to come out of the restaurant yesterday afternoon.

Muterspaw said relatives told police that the woman is the shooter's ex-wife and was dating the man in the truck. She works at the restaurant and was unhurt.

What's your opinion? Does that count as a domestic shooting? Do you think the angry young man who did the shooting was a law abiding citizen up until yesterday, or was he an already disqualified criminal? Either way, it would have been better if guns weren't available to him, right? In hindsight, can we agree on that at least?

Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann's visit to the first-in-the-nation primary state of New Hampshire got off to a rocky start on Saturday morning when she misstated a key fact about the American Revolution in a speech to a group of local conservative activists and students.

"What I love about New Hampshire and what we have in common is our extreme love for liberty," the potential GOP presidential candidate said. "You're the state where the shot was heard around the world in Lexington and Concord." [...]

Three years ago when Sarah Palin kept putting her foot in her mouth, someone said to me "I think they're trying to lose," referring to McCain and Palin. Maybe that's what Michelle Bachmann is doing already. You remember what George said. What do you think?

MATTHEWS: No, but a campus - you said, but you said campuses would be allowed to have kids carrying guns. What about a bar on campus? WENTWORTH: We don't have bars on campus in Texas. MATTHEWS: You don't?! WENTWORTH: It's against, it's against the law in Texas. That's exactly right. MATTHEWS: It is?! WENTWORTH: Yes, sir. No alcohol allowed- MATTHEWS: You can't have a bar - on private college campuses you can't have a bar? WENTWORTH: No you, now you flipped it. We're talking about public- MATTHEWS: Well I didn't flip it. I'm... WENTWORTH: We're talking about public universities. We're not talking about private universities. MATTHEWS: Okay. Okay, where I went to college and a lot of colleges I know they have campus bars. They have them right on campus. WENTWORTH: Well they don't in Texas, they don't in Texas.

It's just about the same story we read every day. In this case the negligent kid was 18. And unlike the typical story of a younger shooter, this article was quite forthcoming about where the gun came from.

The gun used to kill 18-year-old Myles Compton is owned by the father of his best friend.

“He [Jerry Driscoll] maintains those weapons. They are typically unloaded, locked and kept up,” said Lee Davis, a criminal defense attorney who is representing the Driscoll family.

Jerry and Patricia Driscoll weren’t there Thursday night when about six young adults gathered at their home at 9125 Stoney Mountain Drive.

What stands out for me is that when the teenager took out one of the guns and started playing with it, it was already loaded. That would make the family lawyer guilty of lying and covering up a crime. It would, if only Tennessee had sensible laws about proper home storage and security of weapons, which I seriously doubt.

In their recent article, the Gun Owners of America are going all out to fight against some upcoming legislation concerning secret lists and gun ownership. Winston Dorian is right on board with this stuff.

Historically, gun registration has been a prelude to gun confiscation, as documented by the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership almost 20 years ago. They showed how several foreign governments in the Twentieth Century had used gun control -- and quite often gun registration -- to confiscate firearms. In each case, such confiscation was a prelude to genocide.

What's your opinion? Is this a bit over the top? No one is denying that there are examples from the 20th century, but does anyone really believe this is a serious possibility in 21st century United States?